Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 38869 (AP)

Mendu Chenchamma, v. State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal

WP/23578/2016 · 2025-02-17

K Manmadha Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010780322016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 23578/2016 Between: 1. MENDU CHENCHAMMA,, W/O NANCHARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KODUR (DIVI TALUK) KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD. 2. COMMISSIONER ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, TILAK ROAD, BOGGULAKUNTA, HYDERABAD. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. RAMESWARASWAMY TEMPLE, MACHAVARAM, KODUR MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to Issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering with the possession of petitioner land in Sy.No.86/1 admeasuring Ac.1-00 situated at Machavaram Village, Kodur Mandal, Krishna District without due process of law is wholly illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently 2 declare y that the Respondents are not entitled to interfere with his possession of the above said land without due process of law and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) 2. ELEVATED AS JUDGE The Court made the following order: This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering with the possession of petitioner land in Sy No 86/1 admeasuring Ac 100 situated at Machavaram Village Kodur Mandal Krishna District without due process of law is wholly illegal arbitrary violative of Articles 14 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently declare y that the Respondents are not entitled to interfere with his possession of the above said land without due process of law and to pass” 2. Heard Sri Ravi Kondaveeti, learned counsel appearing on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Counter was filed by the unofficial respondent No.4. 3 3. On 21.07.2016, this Court directed both the parties to maintain status quo as on that day. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner’s land in Sy.No.86/1 ad-measuring Ac.1.00 Cents situated at Machavaram Village, Kodur Mandal, Krishna District, without following due process of law. 5. Counter filed by the respondent No.4 reveals that the respondents never entered upon the land belonging to the petitioner or tried to occupy the petitioner’s land and it is only that the temple has constructed the wall around the land belonging to temple i.e., Ac.0.97 Cents in Sy.No.86/1. 6. Recording the submissions, this Writ Petition is closed. If at all any grievance subsists with respect to subject land, the respondents shall follow due process of law by duly issuing notice to the petitioner as contemplated under law. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stands closed. ________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J Dated: 17.02.2025 PSA 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE DR. K. MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 23578 of 2016 Date: 17.02.2025 PSA